First a prefatory statement to pass on to those individuals who may hold some rather pathetic ill informed opinions of this publication as if its primary purpose is to denigrate the leadership of Scott County Republicans. Balderdash. Anybody who believes it has not read the content. The purpose is to help Republicans remain true to a conservative platform and integral with that is to give them references, tools, strategies, argumentation, backbone to fight the lies of the enemy.
There have been about 380 posts in the roughly year veritaspac.com has been in operation. Democrats /Barack Obama / liberals have figured in about 90% I would guess (categories overlap). More than 70 posts have dealt with our favorite pastime of skewering the media in general but especially local media. About 5% of the title topics to date have dealt with distinctly local Republican matters or personalities.
Looking back, as far as content here is concerned, Scott County Republican leadership has not been that important. Indeed we prefer letting our volunteer leadership do their best in support of Republicans, that is except when their best is seen by us as oblivious to good order, impairing good will, ignoring or undermining the platform and those who support it, elbowing around allies while bleating about unity and focus, or show evidence of substantive avoidable error.
But even if critiquing Republican leadership were our primary focus, instead of a periodic matter, well we could do more and do it better. Naive as too many are about the give and take of politics, they should mature themselves by looking at other publications here in Iowa and across the United States if they get the vapors over this lowly amateurish publication and its criticism of Republicans.
For example scanning the pages of the influential political opinion site, The Iowa Republican, one will see a relentless focus on Republican Party of Iowa leadership matters, factions, personalities and failings. They may well have a different perspective then ours but a journal of criticism it is. Comparing our more limited volume (and editors) ours is more issue analysis and commentary on commentary, rather than original reporting. We wish we could be as thorough, as original and have the sophisticated presentation and one tenth of the readership. However we think we do a good job of scanning publications for insightful articles to recommend. And we have at least as much fun going after especially the phoniness of the media and liberalism.
By comparison to larger county central committees around the state, based on what we have heard and read, Scott County internecine problems are no more polarizing then Polk and Linn and probably others have experienced or are experiencing. Sincere political leaders know that a larger stronger organization can emerge from the occasional cacophony if they are a little less defensive, and respond with persuasion instead of exclusionary tactics.
So, grow up, lighten up, cowboy up. This is a journal of political opinion. Republican leadership is not immune from criticism. It needs it. By comparison to the level of honor and integrity displayed by Democrat’s , what we point out here are mere foibles of Republicans. We still appreciate that with relatively few exceptions Republican local, state and national leadership and elected officials mean well and are entirely superior to liberals. But we insist that Republicans do better for a purpose, advancing Republican principles, not merely electing content free members of a “club.” And so . . . ” if this be treason then make the most of it.”
The Meeting
First some overall observations in summary and then, in some individual postings over the next few days, along with other scintillating postings on other matters, we will comment on particulars regarding the evening.
We are at some disadvantage to portray the evening as definitively as we would like in that sitting in the ante room the already bad acoustics were baffled to our disadvantage and there was an otherwise delightful small toddler doing what toddlers do, making noise. The SCRCC should find a larger venue. As it was less than two thirds of the full voting complement seemed to be present. The Bettendorf Community Center would have served better if it were available. Of course we appreciate readers sending in any of their own observations.
The published agenda was essentially a listing of reports by various officers, typically a filibuster venue, then old business which was to be a review and evaluation of the 2012 election. We heard the Chairwoman’s review and evaluation but little engagement was pursued by the Chair as to what others might want to observe. The Chairwoman does not treat the CC committee as a decision making body but rather one to be selectively fed information. To be sure the evening could have gone on for ever addressing the matter. A separate forum devoted to the topic would have been a collegial gesture.
Other reports were predictable. The recitation of minutes, the treasurer’s report which consisted of a bank balance read to us and affirmation of bills paid and legal reports filled. A question was raised by a former long serving officer as to why we had such a substantial balance just after an election. I believe the words were “shouldn’t we plan to be near zero” in the spirit of “why were we not all in for this monumental election.” It deserves more analysis than afforded that evening.
The written agenda listed the topic of elections to fill some precinct openings, and then “moving on” to intentionally create a couple of openings through “recommended removals” of two different precinct captains. We will have more to say about the dynamics of that.
The order from there was “task force” discussions which really did not occur substantively. As structured and focused the process appears to be shaping up as a marginally useful exercise, one entirely dependent on the insightfulness and follow through of the task force leaders. The assignments for the individual task forces seem to reflect only the establishments superficial immediate knee jerk post election analysis.
Which is not to say that the task forces cannot be useful, only that they could result in losing the big picture. The extensive commentary already posted and available from links on this site have had, and will continue to have, a lot to say about the direction of the Republican Party.
The next specified agenda item was a reference to upcoming Executive Committee elections and what turned out to be a perfunctory announcement of the Chair’s appointment of a “Nomination Committee” (sic) . Rumors abound.
The last item listed prior to adjournment “Other?” exhibited the loudest fireworks of the evening, more so than the purges earlier on the agenda. The convulsive crescendo was courtesy of Scott County’s own Treasurer Bill Fennelly, who erupted at the end of a mild mannered announcement by Michael Elliott, a leader of the Republican Liberty Caucus, of his efforts to build support among disaffected Republican leaning elements to enter the Republican fold. Fennelly would have none of Mr. Elliott, and for reasons that do not stand up to scrutiny.
So the evening basically followed the printed agenda. But the real agenda, or perhaps better said, the underlying motivating agenda, seemed to this observer to be avoidance, blame, control.
More on our observations beginning tomorrow.
An interesting recap of what appears to be a largely inconsequential meeting of a curiously ineffective party organization.
I found Roger’s preface to be a possible opening for a potentially constructive dialogue if some of Veritas’s detractors could be moved to respond with meaningful comment.
I attended the above mentioned central committee meeting as a visitor though I was once an elected member. With each meeting I attend I continue to be amazed at how rude and unruly the meetings tend to get if any of the members appear to get out of the order by talking about something that might have some meat to it. I am amazed that the chair person does not control those older white male members who inevitably show their alpha dog temperament by jumping up, snorting and shouting down other newer members who may have the floor and are presenting an intriguing subject for thought to the committee. It is very disturbing and distasteful to say the least. It would seem to me if the chair woman and her board are interested in attracting new members, specifically younger folks, these old dogs will have to be muzzled or the new folks will not stay. The days of the Good ol boy club are over and should not be given a place in the central committee meetings if they want to progress and see success in future elections
The “reigning-in of older white males” task force has been born.